Le aziende a controllo familiare sono considerate in molti Paesi la struttura proprietaria dominante, e la ricerca accademica si è progressivamente concentrata negli ultimi decenni sugli aspetti peculiari che differenziano le aziende familiari dalle altre strutture proprietarie. Nonostante questa convergenza, molti studi hanno sviluppato teorie contrastanti, in modo particolare sulla capacità delle aziende familiari di generare performance finanziarie superiori. Di converso, pochi studi hanno concentrato l’attenzione sulle scelte strategiche che posso spiegare il (maggiore o minore) differenziale di performance delle aziende familiari. Partendo dall’assunto che punti di forza e di debolezza possano coesistere nelle aziende familiari, identificare se siano gli uni o gli altri a prevalere è una sfida complessa se non si prendono in considerazione le scelte strategiche effettuate dalle aziende familiari. Partendo da questo gap nella letteratura, il presente lavoro cerca di misurare l’impatto che la proprietà familiare può avere sulle performance aziendali concentrandosi su tre aspetti principali della strategia d’impresa: il livello di conformità strategico alla media di settore (mediante la creazione di un indice che approssima le principali determinanti della business strategy), l’avvio di un processo di internazionalizzazione attraverso investimenti diretti esteri (IDE), e le implicazioni delle strategie di acquisizione. / The family business is widely considered the dominant property structure around the world and the research on this field has increased rapidly in the last decades to understand whether and in which aspects family firms differ from other organizations. Despite this convergence, the actual body of research on family firms is populated by conflicting theories and findings, especially on the relationship with financial performance. On the other hand, few studies focus their attention on which strategic choices may explain the financial differences between family firms and non-family peers. Starting from this research gap, we think that both positive and negative aspects may coexist in family firms, and it would be difficult to identify which predominate without considering how family principals frame strategic decisions. In our thesis, we try to disentangle the effect of family ownership on firm performance focusing on three main aspects of firm strategy: the level of strategic conformity through the creation of a composite index (in which we incorporated six items that can be considered as key determinants of the business strategy), the departure of the internationalization process through foreign direct investments (FDI), and the implications of acquisition strategies.

Cette thèse porte sur la façon dont les individus prennent des décisions en présence de risque et d'incertitude. Elle est composée de quatre essais qui étudient théoriquement et expérimentalement la prise de décision.Les deux premiers essais étudient des situations où un décideur doit décider si un événement a eu lieu en utilisant des informations incertaines. Le fait d'identifier correctement que cet événement s'est produit est plus rémunéré que le fait d'identifier correctement qu'il ne s'est pas produit. Ce problème de décision induit une divergence entre deux qualités d'une décision : l'optimalité et l'exactitude. Les deux essais reproduisent de telles situations dans une expérience de laboratoire basée sur des tâches perceptuelles et analysent les décisions en utilisant la théorie de la détection du signal pour étudier l'arbitrage optimalité-exactitude. Le premier essai confirme l'existence d'un tel arbitrage avec un rôle dominant de la recherche de l'exactitude. Il explique l'existence de cet arbitrage par utilité non-monétaire associée au fait d'avoir raison. Le deuxième chapitre montre que présenter les informations perceptuelles en dernier contribue à l'existence de l'arbitrage optimalité-exactitude.Le troisième essai étudie comment les préférences vie-à-vie d'autrui interagissent avec l'attitude face à l'ambiguïté. Il présente les résultats d'une expérience où les sujets doivent faire des dons à des associations caritatives. Les dons peuvent avoir des coûts ou des bénéfices ambigus. Nous constatons que l'ambiguïté a pour effet de rendre les individus plus égoïstes. En d'autres termes, nous montrons que les individus utilisent l'ambiguïté comme une excuse pour ne pas donner. Ce comportement d’auto-justification est plus marqué pour les coûts ambigus que pour les avantages ambigus.Le quatrième essai examine la validité externe des mesures de préférence pour le risque en laboratoire en utilisant des décisions dans d'autres tâches expérimentales risquées et des décisions prisent sur en dehors du laboratoire. Nous constatons que les mesures de préférence pour le risque permettent d'expliquer les premières, mais qu'elles n'expliquent pas les secondes. / This thesis investigates how individuals make decisions under risk and uncertainty. It is composed of four essays that theoretically and experimentally investigate decision-making.The first two essays study situations where a decision maker has to decide whether an event has occurred using uncertain evidence. Accurately identifying that this event has occurred is more rewarded than accurately identifying that it has not occurred. This decision problem induces a divergence between two qualities of a decision: optimality and accuracy. Both essays reproduce such situations in a laboratory experiment based on perceptual tasks and analyze behavior using Signal Detection Theory to study the optimality-accuracy trade-off. The first essay confirms the existence of the trade-off with a leading role of accuracy. It explains the trade-off by the concern of individuals for being right. The second chapter finds that presenting perceptual evidence last contributes to the existence of the optimality-accuracy trade-off.The third essay studies how other-regarding preferences interact with attitude toward ambiguity. It reports the results of an experiment where subjects have to make donations to charities. Donations may have either ambiguous costs or ambiguous benefits. We find that other-regarding preferences are decreased under ambiguity. In other terms, we highlight that individual use ambiguity has an excuse not to give. This excuse-driven behavior is stronger for ambiguous costs than ambiguous benefits.The fourth essay challenges the external validity of laboratory risk preference measures using behavior in experimental risk tasks and naturally occurring behavior under risk. We find that risk preference measures are related with the former but that they fail to explain the latter.